Topic: Verifiable Claims Implementations to Demo

Christopher Allen: One of the goals of RWOT is to initially replicate what PGP does as far as web of trust is concerned. ✪

... with more modern technolgies / approaches.

... One thing that PGP does is establish a peer chain.

... we would like to get that implemented with some kind of self-signed claim. Demonstrate validity. Then talk about more difficult things like trust anchors, chain points, and other things that we would like to propose during RWOT

... I have raised a little bit of funds.. there might be some interest. if other people have time available or want to participate in different ways let ChristopherA know.

David Ezell: I have concerns. I know that we have a session planned for VC at F2F in Lisbon. I am letting you know that having that session sends the right message to management. I would like to keep that session. ✪

... let's work together to develop the content and convey the concerns about the delays.

Manu Sporny: Current plan is to try to socialize it widely at W3C. Be careful about how we say things about the involvement of W3M. It would be good to get some feedback from Wendy before TPAC. ✪

Christopher Allen: I am proceeding even if W3C does not. We have several years of maturity. There are lots of people in the BC area who are interested in interoperability. There aren't other soltuions for us. ✪

Adrian Gropper: Is it possible to know who at MS is involved in the conversation? ✪

Manu Sporny: Mike Champion. Anthony Nadlin. Daniel Buchner. Kim Cameron and his team. Microsoft doesn't seem to be pushing back as strongly as they were at the beginning. Some other naes (scribe failure). ✪

Adrian Gropper: I might be able to reach out top privacy / legal people. ✪

Manu Sporny: If you want to you can apply for EResidency in Estonia. They verify who you are and then they will issue you an ID card you can use for binding agreements, open bank accounts, use certain services etc. ✪

... sign contracts, hire people.

... They want to shift over to a more standardized ecosystem. Something that will scale more with the web. Talked to many people who are interested in VC - digital identity.

... lots of companies want ways to standardize verifiable claims.

... Next steps? Give people information on the VCTF and let them join. Manu is on the advisory board of the eResidency program.

... they are planning on meeting again in a year. If anyone has a chance of going, I urge you to do so. They have more foresight than most.

Topic: Planning for W3C TPAC

Manu Sporny: The message at TPAC is that the work is starting. The kickoff meeting is at IIW. Double / Triple up on travel. We have a charter that W3C is reviewing. We are not waiting on that stuff to be approved to begin work. We will continue to build the community and move to implem entations to get things deployed. ✪

... Two opportunities. Wednesday unconference. IG Meeting.

... socialize information. Recruit members and support.

... We need to develop a slide deck for TPAC.

... Manu will take the action for that.

... We need to have the IIW Agenda together. Rely heavily on other people in the group on presenting viewpoints.

Manu Sporny: Christian and I sat down in Estonia. We talked about having namespaced IDs and the complexity it brings to the system. Hopefully everyone would agree on a not-yet existing BC that could exist and act as a centralized source. ✪

... we talked about areas of technical complexity we want to avoid.

Manu Sporny: While there is no JSON-LD working group, the RWoT space is a fine place to do that work. ✪

Tim Holborn: How inbred is BC? Is it a mandatory feature of the VC work? ✪

Manu Sporny: It depends on how far in the future you look. A number of us (christopher, adrian, DB, blockstack, respec network, parts of MS) believe that we will have to ahve some sort of decentralized legder for claims stuff. ✪

... it naturally addresses that problem.

... for VC you can use it with BC and BC protocols. It is not an absolute requirement. For example for many years we have tied them to URLs but there are limitations there.

... for decentralized identifiers I think BC is a requriement. For VC not really.

Dave Longley: Decentralized identifiers are likely to be implemented as URLs, but with a new scheme where they would be located on a decentralized ledger of some sort ✪

Christopher Allen: There are risks of putting too much info on blockchains. A lot of our work is in determinuing what is truly essential. Have persistent identifiers witout the long term risk of putting too much information on immutable ledgers. ✪

Manu Sporny: If we tie too closely to BC we might lose a chunk of the community. They are loosely coupled. There is no requirement for BC in VC. Rather, there are use cases where it makes a great choice. ✪

Manu Sporny: You mention WebDHT. WebDHT always had the idea of a history mechanism. The more we looked at it we needed a ledger. Then the only advantage of WebDHT was a ton of data. ✪

... because of what has happened with storage recently we think that there will not be a problem with storing identity history in the BC. Storage technology is scaling faster than the rate at which we need to allocate IDs.

Christopher Allen: Also, chainpoint is a merkle tree with only the root in a blockchain. It is up to the client to store the leaves to verify it. ✪

... we are now putting our energy into ledgers as a way to solving the decentralized ID problem.